Hacker News Reader

Comment by flogic | Hacker News Reader

Actually, I would argue that "fuck off" is the better response. "I disagree" implies that there's grounds for legitimate discussion when the initial remark is so far out of line there really isn't.

View on HN

Yes. Not to mention: "I disagree" in this particular situation also has the unintended consequence of possibly implying something about whether she has nice breasts, while "fuck off" does not.

(One of the oddball cases where the "more polite" response may in fact, be more harmful)

Exactly, "Fuck off" gets the full message across loud and clear. It is also short enough that you can deliver the full message without any risk of interruption; just two syllables that can slip under the radar after you have the subjects attention.

  [looking the person in the eyes]
  "Hey [whoever]"
  [repeat as necessary until you have eye contact, at most one or two more times]
  "Fuck off."

There is no chance for them to interrupt you mid-protest to make excuses, and it sends a clear signal that the subject is not up for discussion.

While I agree wholeheartedly, remember that some of the problem is the current dichotomy. The sexist ass on one hand and the too non-confrontational to say anything on the other. I'd posit that it's more useful to figure out a realistic way to get that second group to speak out--even if it's not a hearty "fuck off".

I'm a non-confrontational person myself actually. It took me over 35 years to learn being that direct is actually less stressful in certain circumstances. Quite arguably, I'm still learning it. We get it in our heads that we owe the asshole an explanation. That's a trap. The explanation becomes it's own source of stress. Odds are strong, the asshole knows they're being an asshole. No, explanation is required.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com